In the twenties of the nineteenth century the officers of the Seménovski
Regiment, the flower of the youths of that day, for the most part Masons and
subsequently Decembrists, decided not to use any corporal punishment in their
regiment. In spite of the strict
demands of military service at that time, the regiment continued to be a model
one, even without the application of corporal punishment.

One of the commanders of a company of the Seménovski Regiment, upon meeting
one day Sergyéy Ivánovich Muravév, one of the best men of that time, and indeed
of any time, told him about one of his soldiers, a thief and drunkard, saying
that such a soldier could not be brought to his senses in any other way than by
means of the rod. Sergyéy Muravév did
not agree with him and offered to take the soldier in his company.

The transfer was made, and the soldier in the very first days stole a pair
of boots from his comrade, and with the proceeds from the sale of them got
drunk and acted riotously. Sergyéy
Ivánovich called together the company and, calling the soldier to the front,
said to him, “You know that in my company soldiers are not beaten or flogged,
and I will not have you punished. I
will pay with my own money for the boots that you stole, and I beg you, not for
my sake, but for your own sake, to reflect
upon your life and to change it.” And,
having given the soldier friendly instructions, Sergyéy Ivánovich dismissed him.

The soldier again got drunk and had
a fight. And again he was not punished,
but only admonished, “You will only harm yourself the more, but if you mend
your ways, you will be better off for it.
For this reason I ask you not to do such things.”

The soldier was so surprised at this
new way of being treated that he changed completely and became a model soldier.

The narrator of this story was Sergyéy
Ivánovich’s brother, Matvyéy Ivánovich, who, like his brother and all the best men of the time, considered
corporal punishment to be a disgraceful remainder of barbarism. He considered it disgraceful not so much for
the man punished, as for the men punishing, and could never keep back tears of
emotion and transport when he spoke of it, and it was equally impossible to
restrain tears when listening to him.

Corporal punishment was viewed thus
by cultured Russians seventy-five years ago.
Now seventy-five years have passed, and in our time the grandchildren of
these men preside in the capacity of County Council chiefs in courts and calmly
discuss the question whether rods are to be administered or not, and how many
rods are to be given to such and such an adult – a father of a family, often a
grandfather.

But the leaders among these
grandchildren sitting in committees and County Council assemblies hand in
memorandums, addresses, and petitions asking, in the name of hygienic and
pedagogical purposes, that not all the peasants, but only those who have not
finished a course in a popular school, be subject to flogging.

An enormous change has taken place
in the midst of the so-called higher cultured class. The men of the twenties, considering corporal punishment to be a
disgraceful act for themselves, found a way for abolishing it in the
army, where it was thought to be indispensable. The men of our time calmly apply it, not to the soldiers, but to
all men of one of the classes of the Russian people. Cautiously, diplomatically, in committees and assemblies, and
with every imaginable excuse and circumlocution, they address and petition the
government as to whether punishment with rods complies with the demands of
hygiene and so must be limited, or whether it would be desirable to flog only
such peasants as have not finished a course in the rudiments, or whether the
peasants who are included in the manifesto on the occasion of the emperor’s marriage
may be exempted from corporal punishment.

Obviously, a terrible change has taken place in the midst of the so-called
higher Russian society. What is most
remarkable, this change has taken place at a time when the peasant class as
undergone an equally vast change in the last seventy-five years, and especially
in the last thirty-five years since its liberation, only in the opposite
direction. And yet is assumed necessary
to make this class submit to the disgusting, coarse, and stupid torture of
flogging.

While the higher, ruling classes have coarsened and fallen morally to such
an extent that they have legalized flogging and calmly discuss the same, there
has taken place in the peasant class such an uplifting of the mental and moral
level that the application of corporal punishment to this class appears to the
them not only as a physical, but also as a moral torture.

I have heard and read of cases of suicide among peasants condemned to
rods. I cannot refuse to believe this,
because I myself saw an ordinary young peasant, at the mere mention in the
township court of the possibility of administering corporal punishment to him,
grow as pale as a sheet and lose his voice.
I also saw another peasant, of about forty years of age, who was
condemned to corporal punishment, burst out weeping when, in reply to my
question whether the decree of the court was carried out, he had to answer that
it was.

I also know of a case in which an acquaintance of mine, a respectable
middle-aged peasant, was condemned to be flogged for having, as usual, called
the stárosta names, without paying attention to the fact that the stárosta
wore the insignia. This peasant was
taken to the township office, and from there to the shed where the punishment
is administered. The watchman came with
the rods, and the peasant was told to take off his clothes.

“Parmén Ermílych, I have a married son,” said the peasant, turning to the
township elder, and shaking with his whole body. “Can’t this be omitted?
It is a sin.”

“The government, Petróvich – I should gladly – what is to be done?” replied
the embarrassed elder.

Petróvich took off his clothes and lay down.

“Christ has suffered and told us to suffer,” he said.

As the scribe who was present told me, everybody’s arms trembled, and nobody
dared to look into his neighbor’s eyes, feeling that they were doing something
terrible. It is assumed to be
indispensable and apparently useful for someone to flog these people like
beasts. Indeed, even animals are not
allowed to be tortured.

For the good of our Christian enlightened state, it is indispensable to
subject, not all the members of this Christian enlightened state, but only one
of its classes – the most industrious, useful, moral, and numerous – to a most
insipid, indecent, and offensive punishment.

Nineteen centuries after Christ, the highest authorities of an enormous
Christian state have not been able to invent something more useful, clever, and
moral to counteract the violation of laws than that the people who have
violated the laws, grown men, and sometimes old men, be undressed, thrown on
the floor, and beaten with rods on their backsides.[1]

The men of our time, who consider themselves to be leaders, the grandsons of
the men who seventy-five years ago destroyed capital punishment, now most humbly
and quite seriously ask the minister or someone else not to subject the adult
Russians to flogging so much, because the doctors find this unhealthy. They ask not to subject to flogging those
who have finished a course, and to free from flogging those who should be
flogged immediately after the emperor’s marriage. But the wise government keeps profound silence in response to
such frivolous requests or even prohibits them.

But is it possible to ask about these things? Can there be a question about them? There are certain acts, whether they are committed by private
individuals or by governments, which cannot be discussed coolly, condemning the
commission of these acts only under certain conditions. The flogging of adults from one of the
classes of the Russian nation in our time, amidst our meek and enlightened
Christian people, belongs to this class of acts. It is not right to diplomatically approach the government on the
score of hygiene or school education for the abatement of the transgression of
all divine and human laws. Such things
must either not be mentioned at all, or must be talked about as to their
essence and always with contempt and horror.
To ask that only such peasants as have finished the rudiments be not
beaten over their bare hips is the same as if, where the punishment of an
adulterous woman was that she be taken naked through the city, one should ask
that the punishment be applied only to those women who do not know how to knit
stockings, or something like that.

About such things people cannot “ask most humbly” and “ prostrate themselves
before one’s feet,” and so forth. Such
things can and must only be arraigned.
Such things must be arraigned, because these things, when the aspect of
legality is given to them, only disgrace all of us who live in the state where
such acts are committed. Indeed, if the
flogging of the peasants is a law, this law is made for me as much as for
anybody, to secure my peace and well being, but this cannot be admitted.

I do not want and am not able to recognize a law that violates all the
divine and human laws, and I cannot imagine myself of one accord with those who
write and confirm such crimes under the form of law.

If we have to speak at all of this monstrousness, we can only say that there
can be no such law, signatures, or command of the czar that can make a law of a
crime, and that, on the contrary, the vesting of such a crime with the form of
law proves better than anything else that, where such an imaginary legalization
of a crime is possible, no laws exist, but only savage arbitrariness of rude
power. And the crime is this: that the
adults the best class, the peasants, may at the will of the worst class, the
gentry and officials, be subjected to an indecent, savage, and disgusting
punishment.

If we must speak at all of the corporal punishment, which is administered to
but one class, the peasant class, we must not defend the rights of the County
Council assembly. We must not complain
to the governor who protested against the solicitations about stopping the
flogging of those who know how to read.
We must not complain to the senate, or complain still higher than the
senate, as was proposed by the Tambóv County Council. Instead, we must never stop crying and shouting that the
application of this savage punishment, which is no longer used in the case of
children, to one class, the best class of Russians, is a disgrace for all those who take part in it,
directly or indirectly.

Petróvich, who lay down to receive the rods, making the sign of the cross
and saying, “Christ suffered and told us to suffer,” forgave his tormentors
and, after the rods, he remained what he had been. The torture accomplished upon him could have had but one result,
that of making him despise the power that can prescribe such punishments. But on many young men not only the
punishment itself, but also frequently the mere acknowledgment that it is
possible, has the effect of lowering their moral sense and provoking either
desperation or brutality. But this is
not yet the chief harm of this monstrousness.
The chief harm consists in the mental condition of those men who
establish, permit, and prescribe this illegality, those men who use it as a
threat, and all those who live in the conviction that such a violation of all
justice and humanity is necessary for a good, regular life. What a terrible maiming there must be in the
brains and hearts of such men, frequently young men, who, as I myself have
heard, assert with an aspect of profound wisdom that it is impossible not to
flog the peasant, and that it is better for the peasant that he should be
flogged.

It is these people who are to be
pitied most for the bestiality into which they have fallen and in which they
abide.

Therefore, the liberation of the Russian people from the corrupting
influence of this legalized crime is in every way an affair of vast
importance. This liberation will not
take place when those who have finished a course, or any other peasants, or
even all the peasants with the exception of one single peasant, shall be exempted
from corporal punishment, but only when the ruling classes will recognize their
sin and meekly confess to it.

This transcription is under no copyright protection. It is our gift to you.

You may freely copy, print, and transmit it, but please do not change or sell it.

And please bring any mistakes to our attention.

[1] Why this
particular stupid, savage method of causing pain, and no other? Why not stick pins into the shoulder or some
other part of the body, compress the hands or feet in a vise, or something like
that?